globulonhttp://booklikes.com/photo/crop/50/50/upload/avatar/9/f/azure_9f6fadbbef81b37a99e6753a14ca44fa.jpgglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.com2018-12-19T09:46:57+00:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/rssreview2013-07-30T00:00:00+01:002013-07-30T00:00:00+01:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612434/postglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.comreview2013-07-17T00:00:00+01:002013-07-17T00:00:00+01:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612435/postglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.comStill, somehow even with all these defects the book wasn't worthless. Somehow it was still fun to hear their adventures and activities even if we thoroughly wished they could have been more peaceable.
]]>
review: Romans et Contes2013-05-02T00:00:00+01:002013-05-02T00:00:00+01:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612374/romans-et-contesglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.comreview2013-04-23T00:00:00+01:002013-04-23T00:00:00+01:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612439/postglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.comreview2013-04-19T00:00:00+01:002013-04-19T00:00:00+01:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612438/postglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.comreview2013-04-18T00:00:00+01:002013-04-18T00:00:00+01:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612441/postglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.com
]]>
review2013-03-16T00:00:00+00:002013-03-16T00:00:00+00:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612442/postglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.comI liked the "Sweetheart..." story because it seemed like the kind of story that might get told there by soldiers sitting around. I think this was one side of the book that was interesting. There are different types of stories, that work in different ways but that still function to give a reader like me, who wasn't there, a feel for the experience.

I liked "On the Rainy River". I felt I could connect with what he was going through and the idea of running away to some random roadside hotel to work through it.

I liked some of the images of the soldiers talking, the sketches of their personalities. I thought that stuff rang true.

On the other hand, I felt some of it was preachy, for instance "How to tell a true war story". I also felt that the book was hypocritical in that some of the pieces did seem to be emotionally manipulative rather than "true". For instance, "the man I killed". I really felt uncomfortable about his imagined story for the dead man. The whole notion of telling that kind of story and the sort of pity he seems to take on the dead guy was stomach turning. It's a cliche and it's wasn't well done. I think some times he does want to come out with some kind of moral in his stories.

On the whole I didn't think he was that great a writer. I didn't like the way he put in notes like "Start here:" for instance. I can understand he was trying to mess with notions of art and the story but it didn't feel interesting, it just made it seem messy. There's a lot of "telling" rather than "showing" in this book. I feel like there are a lot of short cuts in places. Places where the fact that he's just not a very good writer shows through in an inability to use language to create an effect or to carry an idea. He just kind of hacks at the problems sometimes.

I also think there are just some cliches that really permeate this book. The whole notion that danger can be exhilirating and make you feel more alive. I don't object to this being part of what you are doing, but he states it like it's something that so uniquely true of his experience that it justifies him just bald face saying it repeatedly. That stuff doesn't help me appreciate the experience any more.

As far as the unpleasant or uncomfortable stuff in there. That stuff I can appreciate. That did make me feel more like I was there. It made me feel uncomfortable. I think that was the intended effect. I liked that he presented this stuff with a feeling of understanding for the people who did those things, without trying to justify them. The purpose of these parts did seem "true" to me. That's just what it was like. He isn't engaged in trying to make those things seem more humane, but he's also not presenting them in the spirit of holding them up for us to feel outraged by. I think these are some of the places he can express more subtle effects. He communicates both the humanness of the soldiers doing these things, as well as horror of the actual actions.
]]>
review: Chess for Zebras: Making the Most of White and Black2013-03-11T00:00:00+00:002013-03-11T00:00:00+00:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612377/chess-for-zebras-making-the-most-of-white-and-blackglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.comOn the other hand it was an entertaining read. It's not meant to be any kind of doctrine. The style was engaging. It really feels like hanging out with an interesting, educated, thoughtful grandmaster and just listening to him talk about how he thinks about the game. He comes across as enthusiastic and modest in pleasant way.

I can see though that it might take a certain kind of person to enjoy this book. I think you have to be able to enjoy some spitballing that doesn't really translate to direct variations or concrete how to's. I think that's why as a weak player it might be easy for me to enjoy it because I don't have deeply held mental attitudes about chess, so it's fun for me to just kind of listening to him rap about stuff. I certainly don't think though that he's expecting anyone to read this and come away going "Yes, Rowson has it all figured out.". It's just not that kind of book. I think rather they are interesting ideas that hopefully can enrich how I think about the game as I (hopefully) grow and get stronger.
]]>
review: The Frankenstein-Dracula Variation in the Vienna Game of Chess2013-03-05T00:00:00+00:002013-03-05T00:00:00+00:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612378/the-frankenstein-dracula-variation-in-the-vienna-game-of-chessglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.comreview2013-03-05T00:00:00+00:002013-03-05T00:00:00+00:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612444/postglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.comI myself must make an admission though, I thought I had read the whole series as a boy. I clearly remember much of the first two volumes (and the Hobbit). I almost remember where I was and when I finished the Two Towers the last scene was so vivid to me. However, I don't remember anything really from the Return of the King. It seems I never actually read the third book. I saw the movies when they came out and I think I kind of suspected that I hadn't read it, but it wasn't till reading it to them that it became clear that somehow I had convinced myself that I had read it but hadn't actually.

It's a great series. I think in many ways this defines "epic" for me more than Homer or Vergil. Even not having finished the whole thing it definitely made a big impression on me as a boy.

Paul Bryant has an interesting quote from China Mieville in his review. I think there's some truth to Mieville's criticisms. In some ways there are some sort of ludicrous aspects to the series. Still, I think that's part of adult enjoyment. There's very little that we can be so enthusiastic about as when we are young. When you are young you really unreservedly immerse yourself in things. As adults there's always parts of us that feel dissatisfied. Whether it's the artistry or the level of maturity, or the ideals that animate the narrative. I think for me at least I can kind of hold them together. This is true for a lot of things I encounter. Often I have felt that I was excessively picky and that maybe that pickiness was just a way of distancing myself from things. In thinking about the Lord of the Rings, I guess it seems to me that I'm just never going to go back to being a child and unreservedly taking something on. There's always going to be a critical voice in my mind now. I think though that I can kind of have them both. I don't have to think that the Lord of the Rings is a perfect series while I still say that it was a five star read.

]]>
review2013-02-28T00:00:00+00:002013-02-28T00:00:00+00:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612446/postglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.comI will say that I am still somewhat skeptical of it as a unified theory of all of human history, but it clearly is an important contribution to the discussion about large scale history.

I wouldn't have picked myself as someone who prior to reading this would be very welcoming to geographical determinism and while I certainly am no convert, I have been persuaded that we can concretely talk about geography as a huge factor in the evolution of societies.
]]>
review: The Castle of Otranto (World's Classics)2013-02-24T00:00:00+00:002013-02-24T00:00:00+00:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612380/the-castle-of-otranto-world-s-classicsglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.comreview2013-02-24T00:00:00+00:002013-02-24T00:00:00+00:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612436/postglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.com
review by spenkevich that pushed me to get a copy. So far I have enjoyed the stories I read here as well.
]]>
review2012-11-08T00:00:00+00:002012-11-08T00:00:00+00:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612447/postglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.comreview2012-10-25T00:00:00+01:002012-10-25T00:00:00+01:00http://globulon.booklikes.com/post/612443/postglobulonhttp://globulon.booklikes.com